#turing bill

[adventuresinsocialpolicy]

The last few days have seen some confusion over the law relating to historic convictions for consensual gay sex. First, the government announced that it would accept an amendment (proposed by the L…

Someone brought this up at a party the other night, and I was frustrated that I couldn’t explain the nuances properly. This post is what I needed.

[thecoppercow]

Here’s why that "outrage! homophobic filibustering of the Turing Bill! It’s all over!"...wasn’t actually true.

Idk if it’s because they genuinely didn’t bother to google the facts, or they knew the facts, and wanted to stir up a bit of outrage for notes, but the tone of those ‘sign this petition now to force PM May to act on pardons for convicted gay men/This Evil Tory Homophobically Killed Off The Idea of Pardons Forever/how dare the tories filibuster and pass out this Brave SNP Warrior’s Bill to Pardon Gay Men, This Shows They Have Not Changed’ posts are annoying me. Because they are not true.

I hate having to defend Tories, but you can’t just shit-stir over fake stuff, otherwise you’ll have no outrage left for the (many, many) genuinely shitty things in life.

The Tories have, historically, been homophobic twats. Complete dicks.

The SNP, however, have also had, in the past, problematic moments re: homophobia.

Things have changed, and now the Tory party are trying to be (or at least act) more inclusive, move with the times, blah. However, their record is still mixed, and they still have issues with individuals, attitudes, and record in govt (faith schools, asylum, etc.) To what extent you take them in good faith is up to you. (I am suspicious of them, myself, but you take what you can get.)

Same goes for the SNP, at least in terms of record on schools, etc.

In 2012, the government passed an act that meant that any LGBT person who had been arrested and convicted for having consensual sex with another adult under the charge of “gross indecency”, could apply to the Home Office, and have this conviction disregarded (not pardoned).

“Gross indecency” used to be a term that applied to a lot of unrelated shit. So if you were two adult dudes having consensual sex you’d be shoved into the same category as unconsensual sex and underage sex, the charge just lumped them in together. This is relevant.

In their 2015 manifesto, the Tories pledged to bring in a ‘Turing law’ to pardon (not disregarded) men who would have been arrested and convicted for the crime of being gay decades ago, who might since have died, like Alan Turing. They’re in the process of doing this now: (x) The way this will happen is called the Sharkey Amendment, and applies to England and Wales.

(Yes, the Sharkey Amendment doesn’t apply to Scotland. For Scotland, you’d have to ask the scottish govt at Holyrood to do something. Can’t for the life of me remember who’s in power there atm, though.)

 John Nicholson an SNP MP, then decides to make his own Bill, which would automatically pardon all people convicted of gross indecency. He is told, in advance, that this might run the risk of unintended consequences and how he needs to rewrite a bit of the bill (this is why drafting a bill takes so long and isn’t just a case of waving a wand and saying ‘law done’ - a badly written bill can fuck things up and then you have to counter it: x) because a lot of stuff was lumped together under “gross indecency” that you don’t want to accidentally pardon while trying to do a good thing (see 6).

He doesn’t rewrite the bill, insisting that one of the clauses is enough to cancel this out. The govt say it isn’t enough, asked him to sit down with them and draft a new one. The SNP say it is. (According to law, the area of pardons is tricky - this piece is really good at explaining why). Instead of doing anything or even forcing a vote, the SNP just pick a parliamentary fight because why not. Some MPs, like Chris Bryant, (who gave a heartbreaking speech about his experiences as a gay man in 1981 that you should read: x) suggested they could send the flawed bill along to the committee stage and take the badly done bits out then, but others seem to think a bill badly written should go. The minister bringing forward the Sharkey Amendment, Sam Gyimah, talks it out/filibusters it. This isn’t because of homophobia or because he “didn’t want the credit to go to the SNP” (lol what) but because he thinks his amendment is quicker, less ambiguous, and easier. Which, tbh... it looks like is.

Instead of reporting all this, because boring process, some press go with headlines like ‘OMG Sam Gyimah filibustered a bill to help gay people for no reason! They haven’t changed!” or “OMG the bill to help gay people get pardons has failed - FOREVER”. This is irresponsible journalism, tbh, but it starts spreading.

The SNP, never missing an opportunity to make political brownie points from peoples’ ignorance of parly procedure (see: labstaingate, the hoohaa about holyrood, literally their whole MO) all, including those who knew better, jump on various media and decide to whip up faux-outrage about this. They essentially lie-by-omission and pretend their bill alone was going to result in pardons, pretend that their bill was was totally unflawed, and pretend that their bill was talked down only because Gyimah was homophobic or just ‘wanted the credit for himself’ (seriously lol what), and the Sharkey Amendment isn’t as good as the Turing Bill because reasons. None of which is true, and tbh I find says a lot more about them than it does anyone else. Cheap, opportunistic, good at playing people like a fiddle.

Tl:dr - what difference does this make? The ‘Turing Law’ is still getting passed, the outcome will still be the same, but the SNP get to whip up some outrage, and that little bit more trust in the lawmaking process is eroded.

[thunderfcknroad]

I am heartbroken about the Turing Bill not being passed. This is a disgrace.

[elicatkin]

The Tory Minister had kept speaking in order to ensure the Bill was killed off. Rumours suggest the UK Govt did not want an SNP MP to receive credit.

(via Missing the news aspect entirely - YouTube)

[ididliterallynothingtoday]

Just in case people were under the impression that the Turing Bill had passed and that all those people convicted for being gay were being pardoned...

[ianchisnall]

The Government wants to be in control

The Government wants to be in control - and is prepared to use undemocratic tactics

The scene in Parliament on Friday of serial Filibusterer Sam Gyimah talking out yet another private members bill was not new, after all he has done it so many times that I have blogged about his ‘expertise’ in this anti-democratic process on at least two other occasions. The problem with filibusters which have been employed by Governments led by Labour and Conservative alike is that they deny MPs…

View On WordPress